Login | Register
GST Library
TaxReply Support
YouTube Videos
Twitter
Buy Premium Tax Domains
About Us
Contact Us
Our Services
TaxReply India Pvt Ltd

SHRI SANJAY DEWAN, SH. KRISHNA, SH. MUNESH CHANDRA TAMANG, COLONEL MUNESH CHANDRA TAMANG, COMMANDING OFFICER, SH. RAJESH KUMER, SH. MOHD, SHAHID, SH. SURINDER KUMAR SINDHWANI, SH. DHIRENDRA PRATAP SINGH, SH. SUNIL BHALLA, SH. SARVESH KUMAR SH. KHEM CHAND GUPTA, SH. RITESH VIJ, DIRECTOR GENERAL OF ANTI-PROFITEERING, INDIRECT TAXES & CUSTOMS vs. M/S. VATIKA LTD.
(National Anti Profiteering Authority)

Hon'ble Judges:

B.N.SHARMA
J.C.CHAUHAN
AMAND SHAH
Pet. Counsel
Na
Res. Counsel
Na

Petitioner / Applicant

SHRI SANJAY DEWAN, SH. KRISHNA, SH. MUNESH CHANDRA TAMANG, COLONEL MUNESH CHANDRA TAMANG, COMMANDING OFFICER, SH. RAJESH KUMER, SH. MOHD, SHAHID, SH. SURINDER KUMAR SINDHWANI, SH. DHIRENDRA PRATAP SINGH, SH. SUNIL BHALLA, SH. SARVESH KUMAR SH. KHEM CHAND GUPTA, SH. RITESH VIJ, DIRECTOR GENERAL OF ANTI-PROFITEERING, INDIRECT TAXES & CUSTOMS
Respondent M/S. VATIKA LTD.
Court

NAA (National Anti Profiteering Authority)

Date Dec 2, 2019
Order No.

64/2019

Citation

2019(12) TAXREPLY 1249
Original Order
My Favorites
Add to Fav ☆
Add to favorites.

TaxGPT Beta

Summarize this case by TaxGPT in
  AA   |   Print

ORDER

ORDER 1. The present Report dated 19.06.2019 has been received from the Applicant No. 12 i.e. the Director General of Anti-Profiteering (DGAP) after detailed investigation under Rule 129 (6) of the Central Goods & Service Tax (CGST) Rules, 2017. The brief facts of the present case are that the Haryana State Screening Committee on Anti-Profiteering, had forwarded an application dated 28.09.2018 filed by the Applicant No. 1 to the Standing Committee on Anti-Profiteering under Rule 128 of the CGST Rules, 2017 on 30.10.2018. The Applicant No. 1 had stated in his application that the Respondent had resorted to profiteering in respect of supply of construction services related to purchase of Flat No. 31, GF, E-1, Premium Floor, Vatika Indian Next, Gurgaon 122004. The Applicant No. 1 had also alleged that the Respondent had not passed on the benefit of Input Tax Credit (ITC) by way of commensurate reduction in the price of the apartment purchased by him, on implementation of GST w.....

Premium Content !

This is premium content of TaxReply, available to paid subscribers only.

Kindly Subscribe GST Library to unlock all features.
View Subscription Plans
Download Full Judgement :
  Hide
28
May
S
M
T
W
T
F
S
28 May

☑ Monthly | GSTR-11

GSTR-11 for the m/o Apr 2025 (Statement of inward supplies by persons having Unique Identification Number (UIN)).